Satishbhai Dhanjibhai Solanki vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court

Satishbhai Dhanjibhai Solanki vs State Of Gujarat on 16 September, 2025

                                                                                                                        NEUTRAL CITATION




                              C/SCA/11846/2020                                            ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025

                                                                                                                         undefined




                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                      R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11846 of 2020

                       ==========================================================
                                                    SATISHBHAI DHANJIBHAI SOLANKI
                                                                Versus
                                                       STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
                       ==========================================================
                       Appearance:
                       MR SHALIN MEHTA, SENIOR ADVOCATE with
                       MS ADITI S RAOL(8128) for the Petitioner

                       MS POOJA ASHAR, AGP for the Respondents - State Authorities
                       ==========================================================

                          CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT

                                                             Date : 16/09/2025

                                                                  ORAL ORDER

1.1 The present petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner with the following main prayers.

" 19(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order of direction declaring the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in extending the benefit contained in the Finance Department circular dated 16.07.2019 ordering payment of the minimum of pay scale of the post against which the part-timers are appointed to the petitioner herein as discriminatory and arbitrary and thus violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India;

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined (B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondent authorities to extend the benefits contained in Finance Department Circular dated 16.07.2019 to the petitioner;

(C) Pending admission and final hearing of the petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to pay the petitioner the minimum of the pay scale of the post against which he is appointed as part-timer with immediate effect;

(D) Pending admission and final hearing of the petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the respondent authorities from terminating the service of the petitioner for eventual engagement of outsourcing agency / contractor;

(E) Pending admission and final hearing of the matter, Your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the respondent authorities from taking any coercive action against the petitioner or from terminating his services otherwise than in accordance with law; "

1.2 During the pendency of this petition, as there are Page 2 of 14 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 21:56:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined subsequent developments, the petitioner has placed the relevant facts on record and thereby added the following prayer with the permission of the Court vide order dated 19.07.2024.

"19AA. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside office order dated 08.02.2023 passed by the District Treasury Officer, Nadiad, respondent no.2 (Annexure-H) rejecting the petitioner's case for benefits of resolution dated 16.07.2019."

2. Heard learned advocates. Rule returnable forthwith.

With the consent of the learned advocates, this petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal today.

3.1 Learned senior advocate Mr.Shalin Mehta with learned advocate Ms.Aditi Raol for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner came to be appointed as a part time Safai Kamdar by respondent No.2 on 01.07.2012 and since then, he has been in service; and that on paper, the petitioner was appointed to work for four hours a day, but in reality, he is working for six hours a day; and that though he is called part-timer, in actual fact, he has been rendering service full time, on fixed pay, without any allowance or any Page 3 of 14 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 21:56:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined other benefits that are given to the regular employees of the State Government; and that the petitioner is being paid less than the minimum wages prescribed by the State Government and the wages of the petitioner is not being revised from time to time as per the minimum wages prevalent in the State. He has submitted that this petition may be allowed.

3.2 In support of his submissions, he has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab versus Jagjit Singh reported in (2017) 1 SCC 248.

He has also relied upon the decision of this Court recorded on Special Civil Application No.7462 of 2012 and cognate matters dated 21.12.2018, which is confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No.1155 of 2019 dated 09.05.2019. He has also relied upon the Circular dated 16.07.2019 issued by the Finance Department ordering payment of minimum of the pay scale to the post against which the part-timers are appointed.

3.3 He has drawn the attention of this Court towards the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 19.07.2022 recorded on Special Civil Application No.6852 of 2020. The operative part of the said order reads as under.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined " 22. For all the aforesaid reasons as discussed hereinabove considering the categories namely 8 in number, the petitioners are held to be entitled to the benefit of Circular dated 16.7.2019 and, therefore, all these petitions are allowed and the rejections if any, on these grounds as mentioned hereinabove are quashed and set aside.

23. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. No order as to costs."

3.4 He has also drawn the attention of this Court towards the earlier orders passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 06.08.2021 and 31.03.2023 recorded on this petition, which are as under.

" Order dated 06.08.2021 :

1. In the present group of writ petitions, the petitioners are praying for extending the benefits of the circular dated 16.07.2019 issued by the Finance Department.

2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are in fact rendering services of full time employees, though they were appointed as part timers on a fixed monthly salary.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined

3. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Shalin Mehta appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and Others vs. Jagjit Singh and Others, (2017) 1 SCC 248. He has further submitted that after considering the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court, the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 21.12.2018 rendered in Special Civil Application No.7462 of 2012 and allied matters, while considering the policy of outsourcing promulgated vide resolutions dated 10.02.2006 and 25.04.2012, has directed the State Government to consider the cases for payment of minimum wages in the last pay grade as enunciated by the Supreme Court in the case of Jagjit Singh and Others (supra). The aforesaid judgment was subject matter of challenge before the Division Bench and the Division Bench vide common order dated 09.05.2019 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.1155 of 2019 and allied matters confirmed the view of the Coordinate Bench. He has further submitted that thereafter the State Government issued a resolution dated 16.07.2019, extending the benefits of the judgments of this Court to such part time employees/temporary ad hoc employees. It was promulgated that such employees would be granted the fixed pay of Rs.14,800/- in the minimum pay scale of Class-IV employees. It is the case of the present Page 6 of 14 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 21:56:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined petitioners that though their cases are squarely covered by the said resolution, however, they are not extended such benefits.

4. Learned AGP has submitted that for extending the aforesaid benefits, the service of the petitioners are required to be verified by the concerned department and a proposal has to be sent to the respondent - Finance Department, as per the scheme of the resolution and accordingly, if it is found that the petitioners are entitled, such benefits will be extended.

5. The Coordinate Bench of this Court has specifically observed that in fact the entire policy of outsourcing, which was introduced with resolutions dated 10.02.2006 and 25.04.2012, was held to be illegal. Thus, after the judgments rendered by this Court, it is not open for the State Authorities to engage any employees by way of outsourcing and even if they are engaged, they would be entitled for the wages, as provided under the resolution dated 16.07.2019.

7. In the considered opinion of this Court, the present group of writ petitions can be disposed of with a direction to the respondent- Finance Department to examine the cases of the present petitioners with regard to extending the benefits of the resolution dated 16.07.2019. The Page 7 of 14 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 21:56:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined respondent-Finance Department is directed to call for necessary details of all the petitioners from the concerned departments within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the present order. The concerned departments are also directed to cooperate and forward the details of the present petitioners to the Finance Department expeditiously within a period of two weeks thereafter. The Finance Department is further directed to examine each case of the petitioners with regard to their service conditions and if they are found eligible as per the judgment dated 21.12.2018 passed in Special Civil Application No.7462 of 2012 and allied matters and order dated 09.05.2019 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.1555 of 2019 and as per the resolution dated 16.07.2019, such benefits shall be extended to them. The Finance Department is directed to pass appropriate orders after receipt of the details of the petitioners within a period of four weeks. It is clarified that the Finance Department, while examining each of the case of the petitioner, shall specifically keep in mind that the entire policy of outsourcing introduced vide Resolutions dated 10.02.2006 and 25.04.2012 has been declared illegal. It is declared by this Court in the aforementioned decisions that all such employees, who are terminated or affected due to the said policy, are to be reinstated and conferred the benefit of minimum pay. Thus, the only factor, Page 8 of 14 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 21:56:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined which is requires to be examined in the case of the petitioners is that whether the policy of outsourcing is/was detrimental to their service conditions, including their termination or non- conferring of minimum pay.

8. It is clarified that if any adverse decision is taken against the present petitioners, it shall be communicated to them and it would be open for the petitioners to revive the present writ petitions by filing a simple note before the Registry."

Order dated 31.03.2023 :

1. The present matter is listed in view of the note filed by the learned advocate for the petitioner seeking revival of the writ petition apropos the petitioner since the State Authority has rejected his claim by the order dated 16.07.2022.

2. By the order dated 06.08.2021, the captioned writ petition was disposed of by directing the respondent authorities to examine the case of the petitioner for the ground of wages as per the resolution dated 16.07.2019. The Court had reserved the liberty in favour of the petitioner to revive this writ petition by filing a simple note before the Registry in case any order Page 9 of 14 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 21:56:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined or decision is taken refusing to grant such benefit arising out of the resolution dated 16.07.2019.

After the aforesaid order was passed, the State Government has rejected the case of the of the petitioner vide communication dated 08.02.2023.

3. Hence, in view of the liberty reserved in favour of the petitioner, the captioned writ petition is revived qua the petitioner. Registry is directed to restore the writ petition to its original file.

4. The note stands disposed of accordingly."

3.5 He has submitted that the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court (learned Single Judge) dated 19.07.2022 recorded on Special Civil Application No.6852 of 2020 has been challenged by the State Government and others before the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No.724 of 2023, wherein the Division Bench has disposed of the said appeals by observing as under.

"33. For the above, the judgment and order dated 19,.07.2022 of the learned Single Judge, in the case of the writ petitioners - respondents herein, is modified with the observation that the issue with regard to the applicability of the Circular / Government Resolution dated 16.07.2019 Page 10 of 14 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 21:56:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined with regard to the part-time employees working for less than four hours, is left open for examination by this Court in an appropriate case. The observations made by us hereinabove on the opinion drawn by the learned Single Judge in paragraph '17' of the judgment impugned that the circular cannot be restricted to one category of part-time employees, shall not be treated as a binding precedent, inasmuch as, the issue of interpretation of the contents of the Circular dated 16.07.2019, has not arisen in the instant case, in principle. It is further clarified that the observations made hereinabove with regard to the interpretation of the Circular dated 16.07.2019 was only an effort to arrive at a just decision in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.

34. In view of the above, while modifying the judgment and order dated 19.07.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.6852 of 2020 and allied matters, to the above extent, with respect to the respondents herein - writ petitioners, these bunch of appeals are disposed of. In view of the disposal of the main appeals, the connected Civil Applications also stand disposed of."

3.6 He has submitted that in view of above chronology of events, the petitioner is entitled to get the benefits under Page 11 of 14 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 21:56:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined the G.R. dated 16.07.2019 and the order impugned dated 08.02.2023 may be quashed.

4. Learned AGP Ms.Pooja Ashar has vehemently opposed this petition. She has submitted that the petitioner the petitioner is not working full time and he is a part-timer and therefore, no benefit of full time employee should be granted to the petitioner. She has fairly submitted that there cannot be any dispute with regard to the orders passed by the Coordinate Bench as well as Division Bench of this Court. She has fairly submitted that the office order dated 08.02.2023 is passed before the judgment delivered in Letters Patent Appeal No.724 of 2023 dated 11.08.2023, wherein the Hon'ble Division Bench has held that each daily wager, who is working for four hours, should be extended the benefits under the G.R. dated 16.07.2019, and therefore, there can be no infirmity in the order dated 08.02.2023. Therefore, in view of subsequent decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court recorded on Letters Patent Appeal No.724 of 2023, appropriate order may be passed.

5. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties. I have perused the documents available on record. From the record, it transpires that the only question which falls for Page 12 of 14 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 21:56:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined determination of this Court would be that whether the benefits flowing from the G.R. dated 16.07.2019 should be extended to the petitioner or not.

6.1 Looking to the chronology of events as well as the observations made by this Court time and again noted above and the submissions canvassed by the learned senior advocate Mr.Mehta for the petitioner, this Court finds that the petitioner is working as a part-timer. Further, time and again, this Court has confirmed the object of the G.R. dated 16.07.2019, which is for the benefits of the part-timers.

Further, this Court has not denied the benefits to be given to the part-times who are working for four and above hours.

Indisputably, the petitioner is working for four hours or more. Therefore, in view of the settled legal position noted above, the petitioner is entitled to get the benefits under the G.R. dated 16.07.2019.

6.2 Consequently, the impugned order dated 08.02.2023 passed by the District Treasury Officer, Nadiad - respondent No.2 needs to be quashed.

7. In view of above, this petition needs to be allowed and is allowed accordingly. The impugned order dated 08.02.2023 passed by the respondent No.2 is hereby quashed Page 13 of 14 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 21:56:53 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/11846/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 undefined and set aside. Consequently, it is held that the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of the G.R. dated 16.07.2019.

Accordingly, the respondent authorities are directed to extend the benefits under the G.R. dated 16.07.2019 to the petitioner. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

Direct service is permitted.

(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J) M.H. DAVE Page 14 of 14 Uploaded by M.H. DAVE(HC00193) on Tue Sep 23 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Sep 23 21:56:53 IST 2025